Whether non-unanimous jury instructions are constitutional

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED ARE (NONUNANIMOUS INSTRUTED: CASES RIPE "TO}REMOVAL via 28 U.S.C.A.§1443? DOES THE UNITED STATE CONSTITUTION AND AMENDMENTS IN AND OF ITSELF VOID AND NULLIFY AND LSA-C.Cr.P.Art.782 AS THEREIN AUTHORIZING NON-UNANIMOUS JURY INSTRUCTION RELATED TO CASE NON-CAPITAL OR NON-PETTY MANDATING HARD LABOR RETROACTIVE TO JAN. 01,2019;IN OTHER WORDS BEFORE JANUARY 01,2019? DOES NONUNANIMOUS INSTRUCTION ABORT TRIAL STRUCTURE MECHANISM? CAN THE STATE WAIVE A DEFENDANTS RIGHT OF ELECTION BETWEEN A JUDGE ORJURY .TRIAL AT WHERE STATE LAW DENIES A RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY BEFORE ARREST]BY STATE STEALING FRANCHISES ELECTION BY ELECTING TRIAL BY JURY WITHOUT CONSENT OF ACCUSSED CAN ANY SENTENCE BE LEGAL WHEREIN CASE NO 12 JURORS SWORN INTO JURY; THE RECORD FAILS TO REFLECT A USCS §101-103 CERTIFICATE OF POWER; AND NO UNANIMOUS JURY INSTRUCTION IS AUTHORIZED UNDER STATE LAW; WHERE CONSEQUENCE IS MANDATORY CIVIL DEATH’ AT HARD LABOR‘UNDER BILL'.OF PAINS AND PENALTIES? STATE HAS BYPASSED THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND BY LAWLESSNESS WHEREFORE HAD NO JURISDICTION OVER THIS CASE FROM BEFORE ARREST AND CONTINUING ON TO DATE WHEREFORE DOES STATE HAVE ANY RIGHT TO FRIVOLOUS PROCEEDURAL BAR ALLEGATION DUE TO THEIR PROCEEDING AT THEIR OWN DUTY RISK PERIL7JAND INVIOLATE OF USCS §§241-242 et seq.? . DOES INCURABLE STRUTURAL DEFECTS AS FACIALLY REFLECTED HEREIN WHICH AFFECT ‘THE ENTIRE TRIAL MECHANISM SERIOUSLY EFFECT THE FAIRNESS , INTEGRITY AND/OR PUBLIC REPUTATION OF UNITED STATES/STATE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS, AND ARE EXEMPT FROM HARMLESS ERROR REVIEW AS JURISDICTIONAL IN NATURE? DOES INFIRM DEFENDANT DESERVE BETTER ADEQUATE AND EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL IN LAWLESS STATE? VOIDS STATE JURISDICTION BEFORE ARREST’ RELATED TO HARD LABOR CONSEQUENCE STATUTES DOES THE CURRENT GIVE RETROACTIVE DUE PROCESS,OR EX POST FACTO APPLICATION OF THE LAW TO CASES BEFORE THE : JANUARY 01,2019 DEMARKATION? Iv.0 IV. QUESTION(S) PRESENTED [conT. ] WHETHER THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES PROVIDING THAT ‘'"THE RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY SHALL BE ‘PRESERVED;,"' OPERATES ‘BY OWN=FORCE TO RENDER ANY ONE STATE: RULE, STATUTE OR CONSTITUTION VOID THAT CHARGES INSTRUCTION OF CONCURRENCE OF LESS THAN UNANIMOUS | ;|VERDICT WHETHER CONGRESSIONAL RATIFICATION OF STATE CONSTITUTION WHEREIN HAS PLAIN DENIAL OF RIGHT TO UNANIMOUS: .JURY VERDICT INSTRUCTION ON ITS FACE IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THIS COURT AS INVOLVING THE VALIDITY OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS RELATIVE TO SERIOUS STATE CASES DOES THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION SECURE PROSPECTIVELY THE RIGHT To UNANIMOUS. | JURY CHARGE INSTRUCTION TO SUPPORT A VERDICT AS THE ESSENTIAL JURY TRIAL ELEMENT FEATURE IN COMMON AND CRIMINAL LAW CASES. WHEN STATE CONSTITUTION MANDATES LESS THAN UNANIMOUS _ JURY VERDICT IN SERIOUS CRIMINAL CASES RETROACTIVE TO JANUARY 01,2019 WITHIN SAME SECTION REQUIRING UNANIMOUSE VERDICT IN SERIOUS CRIMINAL CASES PROSPECTIVE TO JANUARY’Y01,2019 DOES THE PEOPLE RETROACTIVATE RAMOS . TO THE DATE OF RATIFICATION OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, 14th AMENDMENT OR THE LOUISIANA DATE OF STATEHOOD DOES LA.CONST.ART.1,§17 PLAIN AND PATENTLY REFLECT DOUBLE STANDARD DEFIANT DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS/EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY CHARGES OF UNANIMITY BY VOTE OF THE PEOPLE OF LA STEALTHILY CRAFTED BY LEGISLATURE WITHOUT ANY IMPARTED POWER TO CHANGE THE CONSTITUTIONAL RULE OF THE SCOTUS AND : SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND AND THEREBY ABRIDGING RIGHTS,PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES OF CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VIOLATING THE UNITED STATES’ CONSTITUTION, 14TH AMENDMENT[ BROWN V.BOE, Topeka] ' CEDES TRIAL OF ALL SERIOUS UNANIMOUS JURY TRIAL INSTRUCTION/VERDICT TO USDC INSIDE BORDERS OF LOUISIANA DUE TO UNIFORM LAWLESSNESS OF LEGAL SYSTEM BY CONSISTENT THEME RUNNING UNDER OVER AND AROUND THE GAUNTLET OF SCOTUS PRESCEDENTS WITH SUFFICIENT VIGOR ATTEMPTING TO AMEND THE LAW OF War CASES BEFORE JAN.01,2019? . ed * . IV. QUESTION(S) PRESENTED[CONT. ] SHOULD THIS HONORABLE COURT DEFER TO LOUISI